franzfelix Angels and Insects is a thoughtful adult tale predicated on an anagram of the word "Insect." It benefits from a provocative story, interesting collection of characters, the charm of a period setting, and several philosophical and social musings, all worthy of consideration. The casting is generally admirable, as is the carefully selected country house setting. Unfortunately, all of this is brought to ruin by Philip Haas' inept directing. Haas is unable to elicit a single convincing reading from any of his characters, each one single dimensional and unsympathetic. Haas does not believe his audience capable of following the subtle story, so every symbol set in florescence, every theme overstated and restated ad nauseam, every moment of foreshadowing underlined and forced. This heavy handed approach is exacerbated by Paul Brown's ridiculously overwrought costumes, which try frantically to convey the image of humans as insects. Worst of all, Alexander Balanescu contributes a genuinely ugly and distracting musical score, which could ruin a far better film. For example, in an early scene when Adamson returns to Britain and is feted at a private ball, instead of using authentic music to nail the period effect and introduce all the elegant and subtle feelings that run beneath the Victorian surface, Balanescu concocts a drone that is an explicit imitation of locusts. This scene, which could be such a foil to the dance in the Amazon that precedes it, is utterly dreadful. If it is artistically useful to scream that humans and bugs are the same, Haas' approach might have worked. For the viewer who prefers to construct his own meanings and contexts, he will deplore that something intelligent has been debased to middle school stupidity. Perhaps those who admired "The Piano" (another film that frantically worried the view would not Get The Message, constantly harassed by garbage music) would also like this film. This viewer regretted that a marvelous story, worthy of a master filmmaker's hand, was wasted, as it is unlikely that anyone will ever attempt a remake. Pity.

LilyDaleLady (**Some very minor spoilers)An excellent and very accurate adaptation of A.S. Byatt's ("Possession") novella, "Morpho Eugenia", which was published along with her "Conjugal Angel" under the title "Angels and Insects".The story basically takes the traditional "plain governess" story that we are familiar with from countless romances, but especially "Jane Eyre", and subverts it, bringing in modern concepts of sexuality, genetics and incest to what is traditionally a very discreet and modest literary genre. The brilliant young actor Mark Rylance (he's also the Artistic Director of the restored Globe Theatre in London) stars as a mid-19th century naturalist who is forced into a lowly teaching position on a estate, when a tragic turn of events destroys his life's work of insect studies in South America. At the house, is a plain but brilliant young governess (Kristen Scott Thomas) but he overlooks her for the aristocratic daughter of the family (Patsy Kensit), who is traditionally blond and gorgeous. Initially blinded by the erotic quality of their marriage, he is gradually drawn into a web of lies and deception by the corrupt aristocratic family.A few reviewers have commented on the loud and gaudy costumes of the film. Although the designers are taking a few liberties, and clearly want us to associate the costumes with various insects, like bees, in fact they are not as bizarre as first impression would indicate. We often think that 19th century costumes were very grim and dark, but this is largely because we only see them in B&W photos of the period, or the few faded examples that have survived. In fact, the bright fabric dyes of the period WERE very loud and gaudy, and the taste of the time was for big prints, contrasting colors and lots of elaborate fringes, ruffles, etc. (I studied fashion history in design school, and I can vouch for this!) It IS startling, because we have been largely misled by "tasteful" costume dramas, but I found the picture of the 19th century represented here to be fresh and authentic.Since many contemporary domestic films and TV movies have dealt with the theme of incest, it may not strike some viewers as all that shocking or extraordinary, but in the tightly repressed Victorian era, such things would be deeply hidden and repressed, and even more so -- never spoken of, which would guarantee that such things would continue to go on, only in secret.I think whether or not this film (or the novella for that matter) touches you, depends on whether you identify with the idea of the "plain jane" who has to inevitably watch the man she desires reject her and choose the prettiest girl. Since these actions result in tragedy and disaster, and the "plain jane" ends up triumphing and getting her man in the end, "Angels and Insects" is following basic romantic novel tradition, with a few highly original and unusual quirks along the way.I personally enjoyed it very much on this level -- however, there may be people (especially some men) who find this sort of thing mind-numbing, and the few graphic sex scenes will not be enough to keep them from running screaming out of the room. So -- make a judgment call on those grounds, but for the right type of viewer, this is intelligent and interesting film-making.

netsmith2001 This movie presents a brilliant stage worthy level of acting to the screen. I was stunned by the quality and subtlety of the performances especially the lead and Kristin Thomas. The story is almost painfully slow but that helps create a mood and sexual tension that works perfectly. I was literally on the edge of my seat both with the drama of the characters and just wanting to be closer to their nuanced performances. Jeremy Kemp as the elder Lord of the manor Sir Harald Alabaster displays aristocratic intelligence rarely found in films. The dinner table discussions of the emergence of the radical new approaches to evolution and culture surrounding Darwin's revelations are compelling. Also the role of Edgar, representing the boorish son who clings to the old ways of class hierarchy is finely wrought. Highly recommended. A thoughtful film.

Andy (film-critic) We begin our film with what seems like the beginning of a National Geographic special. We watch as our main character, William Adamson dances wildly with some naked natives of the Amazon. Meanwhile, back in civilization, Adamson is about to meet Eugenia Alabaster. Miss Eugenia is recovering from the divorce of her first husband, and seems quiet and shut off when Adamson first meets her. Adamson goes back to work, but constantly keeps Eugenia in the corner of his eye. Adamson was working for Eugenia's father when he was in the Amazon collecting insects for her father's collection. On the way back to the States, his boat sank and he lost most of the findings from the Amazon, and also most of his belongings. Out of sympathy, the father allows Adamson to stay at their Victorian mansion. Adamson's new job is to catalog all the items that Eugenia's father has in his bug collection. So, Adamson goes to work, but secretly pines for the love of Eugenia. Through a series of insect events, Eugenia (who is not a huge fan of our four to eight legged friends) decides to marry Adamson and they share a wild night of passionate sex. Then, our story goes downhill. Family secrets surface and Adamson realizes he cannot destroy the strong bond between a brother and sister. *** Possible Spoilers ***Can I not stress that shocking ending enough!!! I stress that because it was one of those moments when the symbolism didn't seem to match the rest of the film. For about two hours I was slapped in the face with the symbolic similarities between the insects that Adamson is researching and the actual human beings that are in his life. The story was really small and dull; in fact, I didn't care much about the characters at all. The shocking ending just didn't seem to match for the rest of the film. I felt like the director did this for no other reasoning than just to shock the viewers at the end of a dull film. I don't know what I was thinking when I saw this ending coming, I was hoping the director wouldn't take it so far, but he did. I have this deep feeling that he hates the normal Victorian era film as much as I do and wanted to just change it up a bit. I have read several reviews that have claimed that this film was one of the best of the year, and I can only laugh at these people. Why on Earth would a film about family discourse along with the track pattern of communal ants be the best film of the year? Also, I had trouble with the lead actor who played Adamson in this film. His ability to speak left much to be desired.Overall, for half of the movie I felt like I was back in my high school biology class doing my insect report, and for the other half I felt like I was touring the fine state of West "By God" Virginia. I would recommend this film for anyone that has a passion for insects as well as for people in their own families. This would be the perfect fit of a film for you!Grade: * out of *****